What is the difference between the angel and the arch-angel?
Angel or Archangel?
by cameo-d 12 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
cameo-d
According to this...how many "chief" angels can there be?
c.1175, from L.L. archangelus, from Gk. arkhangelos "chief angel," from arkh- "chief, first" (see archon) + angelos
It seems to me that arch angels are the ones who "bridge the gap" and actually communicate with humans.
Also, seems that Enoch was a human "adopted" by the arch angels for their purposes and invited to live among them. I think he is also referred to as arch angel.
-
Leolaia
The rule of thumb seems to be that if the angel has a name, it's an archangel. That's at least how it is in the dominant tradition about archangels in the pseudepigrapha, in which a group of four or seven named angels share the distinction of being closest to God's presence, with specific heavenly or cosmic duties. The list of the archangels in 1 Enoch 20 is notable: Uriel, who is in charge of thunder and earthquakes (or Tartarus?), Raphael, who is in charge of healing and the spirits of men, Raguel, who tends the hosts of the luminaries, Michael, who is in charge of the children of Israel, Sariel, who intercedes for the sinners, Gabriel, who is in charge of paradise and the cherubim, and Jeremiel, who is in charge of Hades and leads men's souls to God on Judgment Day. Michael also frequently appears as a psychopomp in the literature (e.g. the Testament of Abraham, Assumption of Moses, Ascension of Isaiah), which of course is also the case in Jude. Raphael appears as a healer in Tobit, and Gabriel is an interpreting angel in Daniel. There was a central core of four archangels (which subsequently was expanded to seven); the War Scroll names them as Michael, Gabriel, Raphael, and Sariel (1QM 9:14-16). "Uriel" also replaces "Sariel" in later tradition.
I believe the archangel traditions are possibly a vestige of the henotheistic roots of Judaism, with the lesser gods being "demoted" to archangels under the scheme of monotheism. Interestingly, there is a rabbinic tradition that the Jews acquired the names of the archangels while they were in exile in Babylon.
-
Witness 007
Allow me to explain as an ex-Servant.....The Ark-Angel steered Noah and his family thru the Flood waters...and then made wine for Noah to get drunk.
-
cameo-d
psychopomp
Leoleia, I thought this was maybe a word you made up. My first impression was that it might be a pompous psychopath.
But then I looked it up.....
Psychopomp, is a very clunky sounding word. It means "soul conductor" . A psychopomp is a shaman who waits with and comforts the soul of a person who is dying and guides them across at the moment of death. A psychopomp also has the ability to search for lost souls, find them and guide them home.
Thanks for the discourse.
-
Leolaia
Some references to Michael as psychopomp:
"The Lord of all, sitting on his holy throne, stretched out of hands and took Adam and handed him over to the archangel Michael, saying to him, 'Take him up into Paradise, to the third heaven, and leave him there until that great and fearful day which I am about to establish for the world.' And the archangel Michael took Adam and brought him away and left him, just as God told him at the pardoning of Adam" (Greek Life of Adam and Eve 37:4-6; written possibly in the middle of the first century AD).
"And immediately Michael the archangel stood beside him with multitudes of angels, and they bore his precious soul in their hands in divinely woven linen. And they tended the body of the righteous Abraham with divine ointments and perfumes until the third day after his death. And they buried him in the promised land at the oak of Mamre, while the angels escorted his precious soul and ascended into heaven ... into Paradise, where there are the tents of my righteous ones and where the mansions of my holy ones, Isaac and Jacob, are in his bosom, where there is no toil, no grief, no moaning, but peace and exultation and endless life" (Testament of Abraham 20:6-14; written possibly in the early second century AD).
"The angel of the Holy Spirit and Michael, the chief of the holy angels, will open his [Jesus'] grave on the third day and the Beloved, sitting on their shoulders, will come forth and send out his twelve disciples" (Ascension of Isaiah 3:15-17; written possibly in the early second century AD).
The reference to Michael the archangel in Jude 9 is certainly in the same vein, as Michael was responsible for the burial of Moses' body (just as he buried Abraham's body in the Testament of Abraham). It is well-known that Jude was here referring to the legend in the Assumption of Moses (see Clement of Alexandria, Adumbr. in Ep. Judae, Cassadorus Fr. 2.1, Origen, De Principiis, 3.2.1, Homily on Joshua, 2.1, Gelasius Cyzicenus, Hist. Eccl. 2.21.7), which concluded with the story of Moses' death in which "Joshua the son of Nun saw a double Moses being taken away, one Moses with the angels, and one on the mountains, honoured with burial in their ravines" (Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 6.15.132), "there was one body which was committed to the earth, and another which was joined to the angel who accompanied him" (Evodius, Bishop of Uzala, Epistle 158.6). The only manuscript of the Assumption of Moses is missing its ending, so I cannot quote it directly, although the book anticipates an ascension story about the soul of Moses, as has Moses say that "God will raise you to the heights and he will fix you firmly in the heaven of the stars, in the place of his habitations" (Assumption of Moses 10:1-10). It was when Michael was sent to bury Moses' body that the dispute with the Devil takes place; this is anticipated as well in Assumption of Moses 11:7 where Joshua asks how a human being would dare to bury Moses' body -- implying that the body should be buried by angels. According to later tradition informed by the book, the Devil claimed ownership over the body by asserting that Moses was guilty of murder (killing the Egyptian in his youth), and was thus unworthy of righteous burial. Michael then rebuked the Devil and asserted that since God is the creator of all, Moses' body belongs to God alone.
-
reniaa
but if we stay strictly biblical and not traditional 'Archangel is only mentioned twice in the bible, once in reference to jesus and once in reference to michael. 1 thess 4:16 jude1:9
16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. 18 Therefore encourage each other with these words.
9 But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not dare to bring a slanderous accusation against him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you!" 10 Yet these men speak abusively against whatever they do not understand; and what things they do understand by instinct, like unreasoning animals—these are the very things that destroy them.
anything refering to archangel outside of these two is extra-biblical
in its purest sense archangel is simply the head of the angels or head-Angel in effect, this is backed up by the scripture in revelations in ref to michael rev 12: 7-9
7 And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8 But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 9 The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.
were there is a great battle between michael and his angels and Satan and his angels.
-
Leolaia
but if we stay strictly biblical
Well, that's the problem. The many little books of the Bible were not written in isolation but within a literary and conceptual context. You are going to get a very skewed idea of what early Christians believed if you stick only to the very small selection of literature that just happened to wind up in the Bible. The term and concept of "archangel" was not coined by Bible writers; it pre-existed Christianity and appears in many books written during the era. The same thing goes with many other concepts that are enigmatically mentioned in the NT (such as "third heaven" or "Jannes and Jambres") but which were well-known at the time. In the case of Jude 9, the author is alluding to a story NOT FOUND IN THE BIBLE, but which he expected his readers to know well. This is the only place in the Bible where Michael is even called "archangel". So of course we are justified in looking outside the narrow Bible canon to properly appreciate the conceptual background of Jude 9 (just as a knowledge of 1 Enoch is central to a full understanding of Jude 6 and 14-15, which directly quote the pseudepigraphon). It is patently clear that the author of Jude was steeped in the pseudepigraphal literature of the time.
-
reniaa
Hi leolaia
Indeed jude does refer to enoch but enoch is not inspired of God it has something like 100 chapters is a known book of its day. Its seen as book that lacks the accuracy that comes from being inspired of God but as with most books written by men on history it may have some things that hit the right note and jude picks up on just one of them, talking about archangel michael but that doesn't mean what else enoch says is right or even accurate, enoch isn't the only book refered to by NT authors for clarification here I have to quote from outside source
Other New Testament quotations from, or allusions to, non-Biblical works include Paul's quotations of Aratus (Acts 17:28), Menander (1 Corinthians 15:33) and Epimenides (Titus 1:12). Such usage in no way suggest that the quotations, or the books from which they were taken, are divinely inspired. It only means that the Biblical author found the quotations to be helpful confirmation, clarification, or illustration
As a side point there is a reason catholics don't jump all over enoch as a book for extra clarification lol i'm not sure were but it talks of jesus/son of man being a separate being from God quite literally in the JW sense, So it's a book niether JWs want because it talks of loads of archangels thus not backing the claim of Jesus being michael and a pain for catholics in not backing the trinity. also there is the slight problem of 350 feet high giants ^^
So in conclusion I cannot see how we can reasonably goto Enoch for extra information if jude only allows for that one bit however men liked it at the time, it could be a complete work of mens fiction with only a few titbits of truth in it. There no way to know and all we do know is that there is no argument that it was in anyway inspired and never consider anything but as apocrypha :)
-
slimboyfat
Its seen as book that lacks the accuracy that comes from being inspired of God
Yeah says who?
Try answering without recourse to old WT friends: "evidently", "clearly" or "undoubtedly".